Last visit was: 21 Jul 2024, 20:58 It is currently 21 Jul 2024, 20:58
Toolkit
GMAT Club Daily Prep
Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.

Customized
for You

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Track

every week, we’ll send you an estimated GMAT score based on your performance

Practice
Pays

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.

# K is a set of numbers such that (i) if x is in K, then -x is in K, an

SORT BY:
Tags:
Show Tags
Hide Tags
Math Expert
Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Posts: 94441
Own Kudos [?]: 642836 [101]
Given Kudos: 86716
Math Expert
Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Posts: 94441
Own Kudos [?]: 642836 [33]
Given Kudos: 86716
General Discussion
Intern
Joined: 27 Jan 2014
Posts: 6
Own Kudos [?]: 24 [0]
Given Kudos: 12
Location: India
Concentration: General Management, Finance
GMAT Date: 04-25-2014
GPA: 3.77
WE:Project Management (Investment Banking)
Math Expert
Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Posts: 94441
Own Kudos [?]: 642836 [1]
Given Kudos: 86716
K is a set of numbers such that (i) if x is in K, then -x is in K, an [#permalink]
1
Kudos
sunnymon wrote:
Bunuel, one quick query -> When we say that (from stmt 1) 2 is there in the set and hence -2 is also there -> Here we take 2 and -2 as x and -x, but then we also apply the logic x*y = -4 (here we consider 2 as x and -2 as y (and not as -x)).
Could there be a flaw in the problem statement?

Bunuel wrote:
Bunel can you update the oa? It shows as d on gmat timer.

________________
Done. Thank you.

(i) and (ii) are general rules for the set, meaning that they apply to any numbers in the set:

(i) if a number is in K, then - that number is also in K
(ii) for any two numbers in the set, their product is also in the set.

Hope it's clear.
Intern
Joined: 15 Jan 2013
Posts: 39
Own Kudos [?]: 84 [1]
Given Kudos: 10
Re: K is a set of numbers such that (i) If x is in K, then -x [#permalink]
1
Kudos
can any one tell me why (1) and (2) are insufficient ?
(1) shows that the set is …. -16,-8,-4,-,2,4,8,16….( there is no 12 here) so it is sufficient.
(2) shows that the set is …. -27,-9,-3,3,9,27,…… ( there is no 12 here) so it is sufficient.
so the answer is D … each alone is sufficient.

Tutor
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Posts: 15126
Own Kudos [?]: 66769 [3]
Given Kudos: 436
Location: Pune, India
Re: K is a set of numbers such that (i) If x is in K, then -x [#permalink]
2
Kudos
1
Bookmarks
shagalo wrote:
can any one tell me why (1) and (2) are insufficient ?
(1) shows that the set is …. -16,-8,-4,-,2,4,8,16….( there is no 12 here) so it is sufficient.
(2) shows that the set is …. -27,-9,-3,3,9,27,…… ( there is no 12 here) so it is sufficient.
so the answer is D … each alone is sufficient.

How does statement 1 show that 12 is not in the set? All statement 1 tells you is that 2 is there and hence -2 is there. We don't know anything about other elements. How did you get 4... We are not given that if 2 is there, only powers of 2 will be there.
Intern
Joined: 15 Jan 2013
Posts: 39
Own Kudos [?]: 84 [1]
Given Kudos: 10
Re: K is a set of numbers such that (i) If x is in K, then -x [#permalink]
1
Kudos
VeritasPrepKarishma wrote:
shagalo wrote:
can any one tell me why (1) and (2) are insufficient ?
(1) shows that the set is …. -16,-8,-4,-,2,4,8,16….( there is no 12 here) so it is sufficient.
(2) shows that the set is …. -27,-9,-3,3,9,27,…… ( there is no 12 here) so it is sufficient.
so the answer is D … each alone is sufficient.

How does statement 1 show that 12 is not in the set? All statement 1 tells you is that 2 is there and hence -2 is there. We don't know anything about other elements. How did you get 4, 8 etc. We are not given that if 2 is there, only powers of 2 will be there.

------------------
Sorry but your explanation is not clear.
and i got these numbers " -16,-8,-4,-,2,4,8,16…" after applying the statement (1) on the equation (i) and (ii).
what i understood is that if you applied statement (1) "2 in K", then you will get this set of numbers " -16,-8,-4,-,2,4,8,16…" which do not include 12. the same apply on statement (2).
could you explain what is the flaw in my understanding.

Thanks
Tutor
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Posts: 15126
Own Kudos [?]: 66769 [1]
Given Kudos: 436
Location: Pune, India
Re: K is a set of numbers such that (i) If x is in K, then -x [#permalink]
1
Kudos
shagalo wrote:
VeritasPrepKarishma wrote:
shagalo wrote:
can any one tell me why (1) and (2) are insufficient ?
(1) shows that the set is …. -16,-8,-4,-,2,4,8,16….( there is no 12 here) so it is sufficient.
(2) shows that the set is …. -27,-9,-3,3,9,27,…… ( there is no 12 here) so it is sufficient.
so the answer is D … each alone is sufficient.

How does statement 1 show that 12 is not in the set? All statement 1 tells you is that 2 is there and hence -2 is there. We don't know anything about other elements. How did you get 4, 8 etc. We are not given that if 2 is there, only powers of 2 will be there.

------------------
Sorry but your explanation is not clear.
and i got these numbers " -16,-8,-4,-,2,4,8,16…" after applying the statement (1) on the equation (i) and (ii).
what i understood is that if you applied statement (1) "2 in K", then you will get this set of numbers " -16,-8,-4,-,2,4,8,16…" which do not include 12. the same apply on statement (2).
could you explain what is the flaw in my understanding.

Thanks

Given:
(i) If x is in K, then -x is in K, and
(ii) if each of x and y is in K, then xy is in K
Stmnt 1: 2 is in K

This implies 2, -2, -4 (2*-2), -8 (2*-4), 8 (-2*-4), etc are in the set. 4 will not be there. But how do you know that no other elements are there in the set? Could we have a set like this: {12, 2, 24, -2, -12, -24 ...}
Does it satisfy all 3 conditions given above? Yes.
The set {2, -2, -4, -8, ...} satisfies all 3 conditions too.

Hence we don't know what the set actually looks like. Just because the set has 2 doesn't mean it cannot have 12.
Manager
Joined: 26 Feb 2015
Posts: 94
Own Kudos [?]: 206 [0]
Given Kudos: 43
Re: K is a set of numbers such that (i) if x is in K, then -x is in K, an [#permalink]
What is unclear to me is that it states that xy is in the set, but how can we infer that x*x and y*y is in the set.

-2 and 2
-3 and 3 gives us 6? How can do we infer that -2 * 2 = 4 is in the set?
Math Expert
Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Posts: 94441
Own Kudos [?]: 642836 [3]
Given Kudos: 86716
Re: K is a set of numbers such that (i) if x is in K, then -x is in K, an [#permalink]
3
Kudos
erikvm wrote:
What is unclear to me is that it states that xy is in the set, but how can we infer that x*x and y*y is in the set.

-2 and 2
-3 and 3 gives us 6? How can do we infer that -2 * 2 = 4 is in the set?

(i) and (ii) are general rules for the set, meaning that they apply to any numbers in the set:

(i) if a number is in K, then - that number is also in K
(ii) for any two numbers in the set, their product is also in the set.

(1) says that 2 is in K --> according to (i) -2 is n K --> according to (ii) -2*2=-4 is in K --> according to (i) -(-4)=4 is in K and so on.

(2) says 3 is in K --> according to (i) -3 is n K --> according to (ii) -3*3=-9 is in K --> according to (i) -(-9)=9 is in K and so on.

Does this make sense?
Target Test Prep Representative
Joined: 14 Oct 2015
Status:Founder & CEO
Affiliations: Target Test Prep
Posts: 19175
Own Kudos [?]: 22687 [1]
Given Kudos: 286
Location: United States (CA)
Re: K is a set of numbers such that (i) if x is in K, then -x is in K, an [#permalink]
1
Kudos
Bunuel wrote:
The Official Guide For GMAT® Quantitative Review, 2ND Edition

K is a set of numbers such that

(i) if x is in K, then -x is in K, and
(ii) if each of x and y is in K, then xy is in K.

Is 12 in K?

(1) 2 is in K.
(2) 3 is in K.

Solution:

Statement One Only:

2 is in K.

Since 2 is in K, -2 is in K. Furthermore, 2 * -2 = -4 and 2 * -4 = -8 and -2 * -4 = 8 (and so on) are in K. We see that these numbers are powers of 2 and their opposites. If these are all the numbers in K, then 12 is not in K. However, if 3 is in K, then 4 * 3 = 12 is in K. Statement one alone is not sufficient.

Statement Two Only:

3 is in K.

Since 3 is in K, -3 is in K. Furthermore, 3 * -3 = -9 and 3 * -9 = -27 and -3 * -9 = 27 (and so on) are in K. We see that these numbers are powers of 3 and their opposites. If these are all the numbers in K, then 12 is not in K. On the other hand, if -4 is also in K, then -3 * -4 = 12 is in K. However, since we don’t know that, statement two alone is not sufficient.

Statements One and Two Together:

We see that -4 is in K (from statement one) and -3 is in K (from statement two), so -4 * -3 = 12 is in K.

Director
Joined: 14 Jul 2010
Status:No dream is too large, no dreamer is too small
Posts: 959
Own Kudos [?]: 5019 [0]
Given Kudos: 690
Concentration: Accounting
Re: K is a set of numbers such that (i) if x is in K, then -x is in K, an [#permalink]
Top Contributor
Bunuel wrote:
SOLUTION

K is a set of numbers such that

(i) if x is in K, then -x is in K, and
(ii) if each of x and y is in K, then xy is in K.

Is 12 in K?

(1) 2 is in K --> according to (i) -2 is n K --> according to (ii) -2*2=-4 is in K --> according to (i) -(-4)=4 is in K and so on. Thus we know that 2, -2, -4, 4, 8, -8, 16, -16, ... are in K, so basically powers of 2 and their negative pairs. Is 12 in K? We don't know. Not sufficient.

(2) 3 is in K --> according to (i) -3 is n K --> according to (ii) -3*3=-9 is in K --> according to (i) -(-9)=9 is in K and so on. Thus we know that 3, -3, -9, 9, 27, -27, 81, -81, ... are in K, so basically powers of 3 and their negative pairs. Is 12 in K? We don't know. Not sufficient.

(1)+(2) From (1) 4 is in K and from (2) 3 is in K, hence according to (ii) 4*3=12 must also be in K. Sufficient.

Similar questions to practice:
https://gmatclub.com/forum/for-a-certain ... 61920.html
https://gmatclub.com/forum/for-a-certain ... 36580.html
https://gmatclub.com/forum/a-set-of-numb ... 98829.html
https://gmatclub.com/forum/if-p-is-a-set ... 96630.html
https://gmatclub.com/forum/k-is-a-set-of ... 96907.html
https://gmatclub.com/forum/k-is-a-set-of ... 03005.html

Hope this helps.

Why can't we say that NO 12 is not in the set K considering each option alone?

Originally posted by MHIKER on 18 Oct 2020, 23:04.
Last edited by MHIKER on 19 Oct 2020, 01:01, edited 1 time in total.
Math Expert
Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Posts: 94441
Own Kudos [?]: 642836 [1]
Given Kudos: 86716
Re: K is a set of numbers such that (i) if x is in K, then -x is in K, an [#permalink]
1
Kudos
HIKER80 wrote:
Bunuel wrote:
SOLUTION

K is a set of numbers such that

(i) if x is in K, then -x is in K, and
(ii) if each of x and y is in K, then xy is in K.

Is 12 in K?

(1) 2 is in K --> according to (i) -2 is n K --> according to (ii) -2*2=-4 is in K --> according to (i) -(-4)=4 is in K and so on. Thus we know that 2, -2, -4, 4, 8, -8, 16, -16, ... are in K, so basically powers of 2 and their negative pairs. Is 12 in K? We don't know. Not sufficient.

(2) 3 is in K --> according to (i) -3 is n K --> according to (ii) -3*3=-9 is in K --> according to (i) -(-9)=9 is in K and so on. Thus we know that 3, -3, -9, 9, 27, -27, 81, -81, ... are in K, so basically powers of 3 and their negative pairs. Is 12 in K? We don't know. Not sufficient.

(1)+(2) From (1) 4 is in K and from (2) 3 is in K, hence according to (ii) 4*3=12 must also be in K. Sufficient.

Similar questions to practice:
https://gmatclub.com/forum/for-a-certain ... 61920.html
https://gmatclub.com/forum/for-a-certain ... 36580.html
https://gmatclub.com/forum/a-set-of-numb ... 98829.html
https://gmatclub.com/forum/if-p-is-a-set ... 96630.html
https://gmatclub.com/forum/k-is-a-set-of ... 96907.html
https://gmatclub.com/forum/k-is-a-set-of ... 03005.html

Hope this helps.

Why can't we so that NO 12 is not in the set K considering each option alone?

From (1) we know that 2, -2, -4, 4, 8, -8, 16, -16, ... (powers of 2 and their negative pairs) are in K but this does not mean that there are no other numbers in the K. There CAN be ANY other numbers in K, we don't know. You can notice that other numbers could also be in K if you look at (2), which says that 3 is in K. We don't get that 3 is in K in (1) while (2) says that it is. If 3 could be in K why not 12?
VP
Joined: 11 Aug 2020
Posts: 1246
Own Kudos [?]: 208 [1]
Given Kudos: 332
Re: K is a set of numbers such that (i) if x is in K, then -x is in K, an [#permalink]
1
Kudos
K is a set of numbers such that

(i) if x is in K, then -x is in K, and
(ii) if each of x and y is in K, then xy is in K.

Is 12 in K?

(1) 2 is in K.
Insufficient.
2,-2 are in K

(2) 3 is in K.
Insufficient.
3,-3 are in K

C:
2 and 3 are in K so 2 x 3 = 6 is in K
-2 and -3 are in K so -2 x -3 = 6 is in K
2 and 6 are in K so 2 x 6 = 12 is in K

Sufficient
Director
Joined: 20 Apr 2022
Posts: 592
Own Kudos [?]: 343 [0]
Given Kudos: 330
Location: India
GPA: 3.64
K is a set of numbers such that (i) if x is in K, then -x is in K, an [#permalink]
KarishmaB wrote:
shagalo wrote:
can any one tell me why (1) and (2) are insufficient ?
(1) shows that the set is …. -16,-8,-4,-,2,4,8,16….( there is no 12 here) so it is sufficient.
(2) shows that the set is …. -27,-9,-3,3,9,27,…… ( there is no 12 here) so it is sufficient.
so the answer is D … each alone is sufficient.

How does statement 1 show that 12 is not in the set? All statement 1 tells you is that 2 is there and hence -2 is there. We don't know anything about other elements. How did you get 4... We are not given that if 2 is there, only powers of 2 will be there.

KarishmaB that is because 2*-2=-4 and for every x, there will be -x and hence if we have -4 then we will also have -(-4). Isn't it. Do you still think 4 cannot be there? Pls clarify ThatDudeKnows avigutman
Tutor
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Posts: 15126
Own Kudos [?]: 66769 [2]
Given Kudos: 436
Location: Pune, India
Re: K is a set of numbers such that (i) if x is in K, then -x is in K, an [#permalink]
2
Kudos
Elite097 wrote:
KarishmaB wrote:
shagalo wrote:
can any one tell me why (1) and (2) are insufficient ?
(1) shows that the set is …. -16,-8,-4,-,2,4,8,16….( there is no 12 here) so it is sufficient.
(2) shows that the set is …. -27,-9,-3,3,9,27,…… ( there is no 12 here) so it is sufficient.
so the answer is D … each alone is sufficient.

How does statement 1 show that 12 is not in the set? All statement 1 tells you is that 2 is there and hence -2 is there. We don't know anything about other elements. How did you get 4... We are not given that if 2 is there, only powers of 2 will be there.

KarishmaB that is because 2*-2=-4 and for every x, there will be -x and hence if we have -4 then we will also have -(-4). Isn't it. Do you still think 4 cannot be there? Pls clarify ThatDudeKnows avigutman

The set has 4 in it but we cannot say that the set is exactly {…. -16,-8,-4,-,2,4,8,16…}. These are some of the values but the set may be bigger than this.
We are implying here that there are some values less than -16, then -8 (no values between -8 and -16), then -4, then -2, then 2, then 4, then 8, then 16 (not values between them). Then we have some values greater than 16. We cannot say this.
If 2 is there, we can say that -2/-4/4 etc are there but we cannot say that 12 is NOT there.
Director
Joined: 04 Jun 2020
Posts: 542
Own Kudos [?]: 74 [0]
Given Kudos: 623
Re: K is a set of numbers such that (i) if x is in K, then -x is in K, an [#permalink]
KarishmaB wrote:
shagalo wrote:
can any one tell me why (1) and (2) are insufficient ?
(1) shows that the set is …. -16,-8,-4,-,2,4,8,16….( there is no 12 here) so it is sufficient.
(2) shows that the set is …. -27,-9,-3,3,9,27,…… ( there is no 12 here) so it is sufficient.
so the answer is D … each alone is sufficient.

How does statement 1 show that 12 is not in the set? All statement 1 tells you is that 2 is there and hence -2 is there. We don't know anything about other elements. How did you get 4... We are not given that if 2 is there, only powers of 2 will be there.

KarishmaB

Hope that you had a great weekend!

I immediately thought of this problem below when I saw this question:
https://gmatclub.com/forum/a-set-of-num ... 60975.html

I originally chose answer E for this problem.

For the problem that I linked to, you cannot use the xy rule to work backward (so you cannot deduce that 2*3=6... in other words, you cannot work backward based on the xy rule). Whereas, for this problem, you can use the xy rule to work forward?

Many thanks
Non-Human User
Joined: 09 Sep 2013
Posts: 34040
Own Kudos [?]: 853 [0]
Given Kudos: 0
Re: K is a set of numbers such that (i) if x is in K, then -x is in K, an [#permalink]
Hello from the GMAT Club BumpBot!

Thanks to another GMAT Club member, I have just discovered this valuable topic, yet it had no discussion for over a year. I am now bumping it up - doing my job. I think you may find it valuable (esp those replies with Kudos).

Want to see all other topics I dig out? Follow me (click follow button on profile). You will receive a summary of all topics I bump in your profile area as well as via email.
Re: K is a set of numbers such that (i) if x is in K, then -x is in K, an [#permalink]
Moderator:
Math Expert
94441 posts